h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Ah, c'mon P-c, we know each other better (I hope) than for you to start bickering with me on that Ethics thread and trying to make me look silly. In any case, it won't work.

But I also did want to seriously ask you if you really think I'm being 'prickly' with you lately. Because this is not my version of things at all, but if you feel this and it bothers you, then I do apologise for making you feel that way (even though I have not consciously done this).

And if there is any way you think we can chat more freely on debate threads without you feeling like I'm being 'prickly', please let me know.

Heck, you know me, big-mouth opinionated chica! And I assume that people 'get it' when I'm being ironic or even that I can express a contrary opinion and it won't be taken personally.

Frankly, re: the 'homos not being *normal*' debate - it is something I feel very very srtongly about. And so I will debate that tooth and nail if I think anyone is trying to marginalise homosexuals as being anything less than 'normal'.

But I hope you and I can continue to debate and banter on threads without you feeling I am being 'prickly' or feeling anything negative towards you. You know I like you very very much - at least I hope you do. But disagreeing in debate is . . . well, simply that.

Okay?

?


az

Well, never mind. Just thought I'd try.

See ya around . . .


az

"Prickly" is a euphemistic understatement employed for the purposes of courtesy. Nothing that you have recently said or implied about me is correct, justified or deserved.



Ironically enough, we are in complete and total agreement on this issue, but you never paused long enough to find out. Despite my efforts, you misread what I wrote and we find ourselves here, now.



Yes it is, but what we have exchanged is not disagreement, or even a 'frank exchange of views', it is petty bickering and unjustified personal abuse. Think how many times I apologised for misinterpretation that was never intended, and how many times you came back and renewed your attack instead of accepting my apology.

"Prickly"? Yes, you've been that and more. I dreamt of little else all last night, and I can scarcely focus on my screen here at work. You have publically accused me of being and saying the things I fight most strongly against, and I feel sick.

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

<<"Prickly"? Yes, you've been that and more.>>

Clearly we were misunderstanding each other.

I do not abuse people.

Well, if that's the way you want to see things, then there is no point in saying any more.




az

Not sure about coming back here . . .

Actually asked Noggin if he thought I should. He's out on the balcony having a cig and thinking this over. But I've decided to do it anyhow.

I am quite happy to apologise for my part in our misunderstanding. And I do so quite sincerely. But I also don't want it to turn into a hootoo soap opera, you know what I mean?

I understand that your last post here was very emotional, but I found some of the things you said put my back up. Which was why I unsubbed. I didn't see that you were interested in seeing my side of things at all.

And to be honest, I would have apologised 'publicly' for my misunderstanding of your posts on the Ethics thread this morning had I not seen you saying there that my comments were 'gratuitous abuse'.

Again, put my back up, was feeling a bit angry about that. Whatever.

Meanwhile, I do not like the idea that there are any bad feelings between us. I certainly do not ever want to upset people. And so, no, the idea that I would 'gratuitously abuse' anyone is not something I can agree with.

In any case, I am trying now to make amends, bury the hatchet, whatever you call it. P-c, we've had our ups and downs, ins and outs, for a couple of years now. But we've always come through them by communicating.

May I suggest that in future, if I ever say something to you that you find 'abusive' or 'upsetting' or 'whatever' that you bring it over to my PS so we can talk it over there rather than disrupt a thread with petty bickering?

I'd really appreciate that.


az

Sounds good to me.



This sounds fine on the face of it. But our recent spat shows me a slightly different perspective.

It wasn't that I was/am upset by what you said per se, but that it was said in a 'public' forum. Your comments made me appear to be a homophobe, something I despise, and something *I* would challenge if I saw it on h2g2 or elsewhere. I *couldn't* let that go by without at least trying to 'clear my name' in that same 'public' forum. That's why I kept coming back at you: for the sake of my own 'good name', which means a lot to me.

To be honest, I'm surprised you even considered that I might be harbouring or voicing homophobic thoughts; you should know me better than that.

So, yes, by all means let's try to get along better. I hold no grudge.

Friends?

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

P.S. I'm glad you posted before Noggin came back with his answer. That sort of advice can be very hard to, er, formulate!

Noggin: what I was trying to say in my P.S., somewhat awkwardly, is that I'm I put you in the position where Az asked you what *you* thought.

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

Well, don't want to prolong the *ethics debate thing* but I didn't see at all that I was calling you homophobic, just asking for more clarification about some things you posted.

Of course I know you're not homophobic. Good heavens.

Anyhow . . . hatchet buried, okay?

And thank you for understanding.

<>

Ah, he is so easy going, no worries there.

<<Friends? <>

Okey dokey.

And thanks . . .


az